Well, I don't know what happened to them besides the fact that they weren't charged with a hate crime. They news stopped covering it. It's all nice and good to say that white people getting off are the rule. It is different where the majority of the people and the cops are not white.

Where is this pray tell?Matter of fact, name one case where blacks should have been charged in a hate crime against a white person and they were not, and it's in a city where "the majority of the people and the cops are not white". This happens all the time in your mind, so list ONE!

180. OWNED

*in silky pimp voice* PSR13, what can be said about your argument that hasnt already been said about afghanistan? bombed out and depleted

I dont think that data say whatever you want them to say necessarily. If that were true then there would be no reason to collect data ever.

why dont you inspect the data and show us what YOU want it to say. it seems pretty clear that if the vic was white and the def was black as opposed to white, the DA is substantially more likely to go after the DP. That is consistent with the fact the vast majority of DAs are white, dont you think?

I dont think that data say whatever you want them to say necessarily. If that were true then there would be no reason to collect data ever.

why dont you inspect the data and show us what YOU want it to say. it seems pretty clear that if the vic was white and the def was black as opposed to white, the DA is substantially more likely to go after the DP. That is consistent with the fact the vast majority of DAs are white, dont you think?

That's a big leap. is there no other possible conclusion? could there not have been other factors involved, such as the fact that perhaps those murders committed by the black defendants were particularly heinous and deserving of the DP for reasons having nothing to do with race? i'm not saying they were, i'm just saying that it's possible that there were other things involved.

I dont think that data say whatever you want them to say necessarily. If that were true then there would be no reason to collect data ever.

why dont you inspect the data and show us what YOU want it to say. it seems pretty clear that if the vic was white and the def was black as opposed to white, the DA is substantially more likely to go after the DP. That is consistent with the fact the vast majority of DAs are white, dont you think?

That's a big leap. is there no other possible conclusion? could there not have been other factors involved, such as the fact that perhaps those murders committed by the black defendants were particularly heinous and deserving of the DP for reasons having nothing to do with race? i'm not saying they were, i'm just saying that it's possible that there were other things involved.

What could these other things involved be? I'm not being an ass here, I'm really wondering. What could these things be that caused one race to be DP'd at a 300% differential yet have nothing to do with race?

Well, I don't know what happened to them besides the fact that they weren't charged with a hate crime. They news stopped covering it. It's all nice and good to say that white people getting off are the rule. It is different where the majority of the people and the cops are not white.

Where is this pray tell?Matter of fact, name one case where blacks should have been charged in a hate crime against a white person and they were not, and it's in a city where "the majority of the people and the cops are not white". This happens all the time in your mind, so list ONE!

180. OWNED

*in silky pimp voice* PSR13, what can be said about your argument that hasnt already been said about afghanistan? bombed out and depleted

Haha, right 3peat? Her silence is deafening. I'm so tired of people just spouting off with nothing to back their claims up. Maybe she's doing some research and will hit me up with a long list real soon though. I'm waiting PSR13.

I want to be a DA and I will put anyone in jail for doing this, I don't care who they are, you just don't go out and kill another person like that! It is terrible that we have scum like this in society!

To add to the discussion, an article I found that said that anyone can be victim of hate crimes the same percent. white or black.

"THE UNLIKELIHOOD OF RACE CRIME SEEN IN FBI STATISTICS

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------An Important Message By An Anonymous Contributor to the ACRR Mailbox ...The number of hate crimes per capita in the USA is so low that it begs the question, "Why is there the belief that hate crimes are frequent when actually they are very rare?" The Associate Press ran an article today on FBI statistics for hate crimes, demonstrating that only 4,831 hate crimes were reported having allegedly occured by whites against blacks in the entire nation. Some of these complaints may have been frivolous. The article does not examine the status of the complain nor its outcome.

If we take the entire number of 4,831 hate crimes as the "real" number, we can see that out of 180 million white Americans coming up to a black person on the street, only 1 out of 37,250 persons would be guilty of attempting a hate crime. Of course, the hate crime may have occured only once in the 365 day year or 37,250*365=13,596,000 persons. In other words, a black person would have to pass 13,596,000 white persons before being the victim of a hate crime on any given day.

The blacks are guilty of committing 1,226 hate crimes against whites. Of the 30,000,000 blacks in America, this is about one hate crime committed per 24,469 persons or per year one could pass 8,931,000 blacks before becoming the victim of a hate crime. This is slightly fewer persons than for whites, but nonetheless it is still a very minute hazard.

The question then, is why do we find so many NEWS stories about hate crimes? Perhaps the answer is found in politics and propaganda. There must be persons in the United States, such as groups who receive money for civil rights, human rights, and crime watches who can fund-raise better when people believe that prejudice and hate crimes are predominate.

When we remember the church burning fiasco in which it took six months for the FBI to find a single KKK associate to pin a fire upon and hundreds of black teenagers and ministers setting fires to their churches, we begin to see the desperation in this type of anti-white hatred and viciousness, because that is what white-baiting-hatred-stories like these are all about. Never forget also that President Clinton's 1996 DNC Acceptance Speech contained a lie about whites having placed swastikas on the doors of black soldiers at Fort Bragg's 82nd Airbourne facilities. Mr. Clinton knew full well that a black man had painted those swastikas on those doors in order to implicate white men unfairly, yet the NEWS media nationwide failed to mention this mistake. Had this mistake been made by a Republican, it would have been on page one.

The press wants the public to believe in the fiction of white racial violence, when, as a matter of fact, there is slightly more likelihood that a black hate crime against whites is performed per capita than vice versa. In addition, the number of hate crimes is miniscule. The likelihood of one happening to anyone is less than the likelihood of winning the lottery.